"The Honorable Dr. Rocky Roads Presiding Judge" wrote in
message ...

"Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" wrote in
message m...

This guy seems 7 ****loads smarter than you.

That coming from someone that lost the internet in his truck because he
didn't know when to stop? ROTFLMAO


And this from the coward who forgot to set her brakes and blamed it on
someone who was not only NOT there, but was in a different state posting on
here, and she calls everyone else and "idiot"?? That's funny as hell.

On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 04:37:39 -0500, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick"
wrote:

"Dave Platt" wrote in message
...
I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to be had that
way
or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?

If fed in phase and spaced correctly, there could be gain to the front and
to the back with a decreased propogation to the sides.
This is usually desirable if traveling on a mostly straight stretch of
highway. I think the spacing is a little too far apart for use on most
cars.

I believe you're correct. This is a "broadside array" configuration.

Its gain over a single radiator rises roughly linearly (measured in dB
over a single radiator) up to separations of around 5/8 wavelength. A
separation of 1/2 wavelength gives around 4 dB gain over a single
radiator and a very nice clean pattern (deep null to the sides) - this
is the spacing most frequently described in the literature (e.g.
Kraus, Terman) for broadside arrays. Gain maxes out at just under 5
dB at a 5/8-wavelength spacing (at the cost of a small side-lobe).
[Figures are from the ARRL Antenna Book of a few years ago]

Whether it's worth doing for a vehicle-mobile system is another
question. You need more than .4 wavelengths of separation to get 3 dB
of gain (half a nominal S-unit) - at 11-meter frequencies that's around
14 feet of separation, which I think not many vehicles will allow.
Perhaps if you're driving a "wide load" transporter truck?

At 6 feet of separation between antennas you'd have only around .2
wavelength, which yields less than 1 dB of gain over a single
radiator. Hardly seems cost-effective.

It might make more sense for 2-meter operation... but as most 2-meter
mobile seems to be repeater-based, you really want omni rather than
shaped-beam-down-the-road most of the time.

There's also the matching issue. Each radiator in the array will have
a feedpoint impedance different than what would have if used alone.
You'll have to take this into account when designing the phasing
harness, and you may need an impedance-matching network at the
combining point to establish the 50-ohm load that your transceiver
expects. If you don't match properly your transceiver won't see the
load it expects, and may not deliver full rated power into the load -
you could easily lose more signal strength this way than the array
will gain back. If you do match properly, there will be some amount
of loss in the matching network.

There ain't no free lunch, alas.

Wow, Richard.

This guy seems 7 ****loads smarter than you.

Wonder if he ever "held an FCC license for radio work"?


If i had said it, you would have a field day accusing me of all kinds
of ****.

Since the late 60's i've been working with CB and have done all kinds
of experiments with antennas on a car. You name it, I had it.

As he pointed out, the big problem with CB is, you need way much more
space than a vehicle offers to truly get any usable gain from
cophasing.

Do you know the wavelength of 11 meters?
if 27 feet, the normal height of base antenna, is equal to 5/8 or 1/4
wave, then what is 8/8 or 100%? Well over 100 feet.

So to get the true proportion for proper cophasing, the road aint wide
enough and neither is the vehicle.

The only reason truckers run two antennas is because it looks cooler.

The effectiveness of cophasing in a truck is screwed by the factory
installed crap.

richard wrote in
:

On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 04:37:39 -0500, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\"
Frederick" wrote:

"Dave Platt" wrote in message
...
I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain
to be had that way
or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?

If fed in phase and spaced correctly, there could be gain
to the front and to the back with a decreased propogation
to the sides. This is usually desirable if traveling on a
mostly straight stretch of highway. I think the spacing
is a little too far apart for use on most cars.

I believe you're correct. This is a "broadside array"
configuration.

Its gain over a single radiator rises roughly linearly
(measured in dB over a single radiator) up to separations
of around 5/8 wavelength. A separation of 1/2 wavelength
gives around 4 dB gain over a single radiator and a very
nice clean pattern (deep null to the sides) - this is the
spacing most frequently described in the literature (e.g.
Kraus, Terman) for broadside arrays. Gain maxes out at
just under 5 dB at a 5/8-wavelength spacing (at the cost
of a small side-lobe). [Figures are from the ARRL Antenna
Book of a few years ago]

Whether it's worth doing for a vehicle-mobile system is
another question. You need more than .4 wavelengths of
separation to get 3 dB of gain (half a nominal S-unit) -
at 11-meter frequencies that's around 14 feet of
separation, which I think not many vehicles will allow.
Perhaps if you're driving a "wide load" transporter
truck?

At 6 feet of separation between antennas you'd have only
around .2 wavelength, which yields less than 1 dB of gain
over a single radiator. Hardly seems cost-effective.

It might make more sense for 2-meter operation... but as
most 2-meter mobile seems to be repeater-based, you
really want omni rather than shaped-beam-down-the-road
most of the time.

There's also the matching issue. Each radiator in the
array will have a feedpoint impedance different than what
would have if used alone. You'll have to take this into
account when designing the phasing harness, and you may
need an impedance-matching network at the combining point
to establish the 50-ohm load that your transceiver
expects. If you don't match properly your transceiver
won't see the load it expects, and may not deliver full
rated power into the load - you could easily lose more
signal strength this way than the array will gain back.
If you do match properly, there will be some amount of
loss in the matching network.

There ain't no free lunch, alas.

Wow, Richard.

This guy seems 7 ****loads smarter than you.

Wonder if he ever "held an FCC license for radio work"?


If i had said it, you would have a field day accusing me of
all kinds of ****.

Since the late 60's i've been working with CB and have done
all kinds of experiments with antennas on a car. You name
it, I had it.

As he pointed out, the big problem with CB is, you need way
much more space than a vehicle offers to truly get any
usable gain from cophasing.

Do you know the wavelength of 11 meters?
if 27 feet, the normal height of base antenna, is equal to
5/8 or 1/4 wave, then what is 8/8 or 100%? Well over 100
feet.

So to get the true proportion for proper cophasing, the
road aint wide enough and neither is the vehicle.

The only reason truckers run two antennas is because it
looks cooler.

The effectiveness of cophasing in a truck is screwed by the
factory installed crap.


You still didn't give any useful information. No surpise since
you have none. For an average of the cb band running 1/4 wave
the antennas should be spaced 54 inches apart. Use a
commercially produced cophase harness if you can find it. Make
sure you match the SWR and you will out do any other mobile
off the front or rear.

Toop

On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 08:05:31 -0500, "Douglas W Adair"
wrote:

I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to be had that way
or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?


Not much on a big truck.
Since most of the usable cophased signal is blocked by the cab and
trailer. I've found a single antenna works just as good.

What hurts the system the most, is the factory installed crap.
They generally use the smaller 75ohm cable and use splice after splice
to make it work. I generally get my own cable, bypass their stuff.

One thing to remember in cophasing, cable length DOES make a
difference. If they are not equal, things will be out of whack. Unlike
in a single antenna where length is not an issue.

Oh and for all you loudmouths out there, the only reason they say you
must have x amount of feet, is to sell the damn cable.

In reality, the shorter the cable, the better off you are.

Have you held an FCC license for radio work?
I have.

On Nov 30, 10:02*pm, richard wrote:
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 08:05:31 -0500, "Douglas W Adair"
wrote:

I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to be had that way
or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?

Not much on a big truck.
Since most of the usable cophased signal is blocked by the cab and
trailer. I've found a single antenna works just as good.

What hurts the system the most, is the factory installed crap.
They generally use the smaller 75ohm cable and use splice after splice
to make it work. I generally get my own cable, bypass their stuff.

Since the feed point impedance of most of those antennas is really way
less than 50 ohms 75 ohm cable may not be the best choice to make a
phaasing harness. Most of the time 50 ohm cable works better

"Douglas W Adair" wrote in
:

I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to
be had that way or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the
petro?



If you are going to co-phase get a comercially produced co-phase
harness. Mount the anteneas 54" apart for cb band.

"Top" wrote in message
.. .

If you are going to co-phase get a comercially produced co-phase
harness. Mount the anteneas 54" apart for cb band.

Please list your references

"Douglas W Adair" wrote in message
...
I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to be had that way
or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?


the real gain in that arrangement is in the thickness of the sales man's
wallet.

Dave wrote:
"Douglas W Adair" wrote in message
...
I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to be had that way
or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?


the real gain in that arrangement is in the thickness of the sales man's
wallet.

They certainly look better just like dual stacks look better than a
single stack.

On Dec 1, 6:42*pm, "The Honorable Dr. Rocky Roads Presiding Judge"
wrote:
Dave wrote:
"Douglas W Adair" wrote in message
...
I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to be had that way
or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?

the real gain in that arrangement is in the thickness of the sales man's
wallet.

- They certainly look better just like dual stacks
- look better than a single stack.

breaker, Breaker. BREAKER !

Ken I Gita Ray Di Oh Checka !?!